On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 00:08:50 +0900 Osamu Aoki wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks Michael for your effort. > > On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 03:05:06AM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote: > > Attached is a debdiff for the poppler NMU to fix the xpdf-utils > > conflict. I've uploaded the package to mentors [0]. Would you be > > willing to upload this, which should finally allow xpdf into > > testing? > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > Let's not rush to NMU.
The freeze has set in motion a shortened timeframe for fixing issues, and if we want enough time to get xpdf in shape for release, we must fix this blocker issue ASAP. According to the project leader, NMUs are not something that are frowned upon anymore, and most maintainers view them as helpful, so I think we should go ahead with it. > I think we have enough time to wait for poppler maintainer to come up > with post freeze fixes. Let's keep this on BTS so everyone sees and > make poppler maintainer reminded about our issues. I don't think we should risk waiting on the maintainer since if it takes too much longer xpdf will not get in squeeze. > Michael, as I discussed previously, do you have any particular reason to > keep insisting to use versioned "Conflicts"? > Policy 3.9.1 and new lintian seems to suggest to use Breaks. > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-breaks > If we are to make this change, isn't it better to use Breaks? > It looks like pending fix is in old style. I'm not insisting on using Conflicts, I am just trying to introduce the most minimal change as possible for this NMU. > Also why do half-job when we see: > > I retitled following bug and set to normal. > Debian Bug report logs - #558021 > poppler-utils: should use versioned Conflicts: with xpdf-reader > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=558021 This isn't release critical, so it shouldn't be touched by an NMU. It can of course be fixed by the maintainer, but I really don't think we should touch it. > This is Michael's bug report sitting as pending: > Debian Bug report logs - #586620 > poppler-utils: should not conflict with xpdf-utils > 3.02-2 > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=586620 > > Both of these uses old style. > > I mention these as reminder to poppler maintainer. > > Osamu > > I suggest following fix against current unstable package using Breaks: > ------------------- > --- control.old 2010-08-07 23:58:15.522931580 +0900 > +++ control 2010-08-08 00:03:02.086990481 +0900 > @@ -131,11 +131,12 @@ > Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, > ${misc:Depends} > Recommends: ghostscript > -Conflicts: xpdf-utils, > - pdftohtml (<< 0.36-14) > -Replaces: xpdf-utils, > - pdftohtml, > - xpdf-reader > +Breaks: xpdf-utils (<< 3.02-9), > + pdftohtml (<< 0.36-14), > + xpdf-reader (<< 3.02-9) > +Replaces: xpdf-utils (<< 3.02-9), > + pdftohtml (<< 0.36-14), > + xpdf-reader (<< 3.02-9) > Provides: xpdf-utils, > pdftohtml > Description: PDF utilitites (based on libpoppler) I think this would also solve the problem, but again if we're trying to follow good policy/procedure and make minimal (low risk) changes in NMU's, then I say we should stick with my one-line patch. I think the policy says Breaks are recommended; that doesn't mean Conflicts are not allowed. Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
